@inbook {695546,
	title = {Causal Crypticity},
	booktitle = {Handbook of DOHaD \& Society},
	year = {Forthcoming},
	publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	organization = {Cambridge University Press},
	abstract = {
	The concept of {\textquotedblleft}causal crypticity{\textquotedblright} was introduced by Richardson (2021) to describe the DOHaD field{\textquoteright}s high tolerance for both causes and effects that are challenging to observe in nature, show small effect sizes, and are unstable across study populations and contexts.\&nbsp;Causal crypticity can be understood in three ways: as an epistemic norm; as a boundary-delimiting signature of field culture or epistemic style; and as a promissory mode. Increasingly, causal crypticity characterizes many fields of the big data-rich, postgenomic life sciences, making DOHaD science a useful index case for scholars of the history, philosophy, and social studies of science interested in the epistemic terrain and social implications of postgenomic sciences.\&nbsp;The chapter concludes with a discussion of ethical and accountable claimsmaking in DOHaD science under conditions of causal crypticity.\&nbsp;Contact srichard@fas.harvard.edu for advance copy.

},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@webarticle {721781,
	title = {A dystopian vision for women{\textquoteright}s health},
	journal = {The Hill},
	number = {24 March},
	year = {2024},
	abstract = {
	"The Women{\textquoteright}s Health movement has aimed, since the 1970s, to put knowledge in the hands of women and to build collective power within communities around needs identified by women. The Sprint for Women{\textquoteright}s Health sharply diverges from this vision. Appropriating the mission of women{\textquoteright}s health equity and a potentially transformative infusion of government support, it diverts public resources into private profit-driven businesses."

},
	url = {https://thehill.com/opinion/4552145-jill-bidens-dystopian-vision-for-womens-health/},
	author = {Jamie Marsella and Lee, Katharine and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {719111,
	title = {Sex contextualism in laboratory research: Enhancing rigor and precision in the study of sex-related variables},
	journal = {Cell},
	volume = {187},
	number = {6},
	year = {2024},
	month = {Mar 2024},
	pages = {1316-1326},
	abstract = {
	
		Understanding sex-related variation in health and illness requires rigorous and precise approaches to revealing underlying mechanisms. A first step is to recognize that sex is not in and of itself a causal mechanism; rather, it is a classification system comprising a set of categories, usually assigned according to a range of varying traits. Moving beyond sex as a system of classification to working with concrete and measurable sex-related variables is necessary for precision. Whether and how these sex-related variables matter{\textemdash}and what patterns of difference they contribute to{\textemdash}will vary in context-specific ways. Second, when researchers incorporate these sex-related variables into research designs, rigorous analytical methods are needed to allow strongly supported conclusions. Third, the interpretation and reporting of sex-related variation require care to ensure that basic and preclinical research advance health equity for all.
	

},
	url = {https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(24)00174-0},
	author = {Pape, Madeleine and Miyagi, Miriam and Ritz, Stacey A. and Marion Boulicault and Sarah S. Richardson and Maney, Donna}
}
@article {702766,
	title = {The New Genetics of Sexuality},
	journal = {GLQ},
	volume = {30},
	number = {1},
	year = {2024},
	pages = {119{\textendash}140},
	abstract = {In this State of the Field essay, we introduce the central methods, concepts, and key terms in the field of sociogenomics and related genetic sciences. We then review high profile claims from this field that posit genetic theories of gender and sexuality, or that analyze gender and sexuality as variables in the characterization of brain, psychiatric, and medical conditions. Lastly, we characterize the conceptual, methodological, social, and ethical questions opened by this new frontier for an interdisciplinary audience, emphasizing the gap between the sociogenomic imaginary and what the data can and do currently show. Our goal is to build on existing critical perspectives by translating and contextualizing highly technical developments in the new era of genetics research, and to invite scholars to engage with the issues it raises. The article is co-first authored by Alex Borsa and Mia Miyagi.\&nbsp;},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-10938512},
	author = {Alexander Borsa and Miyagi, Miriam and Ichikawa, Kelsey and De Leon De Jesus, Kai and Kai Jillson and Marion Boulicault and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {709836,
	title = {A Gender Hypothesis of Sex Disparities in Adverse Drug Events},
	journal = {Social Science \& Medicine},
	volume = {339},
	number = {116385},
	year = {2023},
	abstract = {Pharmacovigilance databases contain larger numbers of adverse drug events (ADEs)that occurred in women compared to men. The cause of this disparity is frequentlyattributed to sex-linked biological factors. We offer an alternative Gender Hypothesis,positing that gendered social factors are central to the production of aggregate sexdisparities in ADE reports. We describe four pathways through which gender mayinfluence observed sex disparities in pharmacovigilance databases: healthcareutilization; bias and discrimination in the clinic; experience of a drug event as adverse;and pre-existing social and structural determinants of health. We then use data fromthe U.S. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to explore how the GenderHypothesis might generate novel predictions and explanations of sex disparities inADEs in existing widely referenced datasets. Analyzing more than 33 million records ofADEs between 2014 and 2022, we find that patient-reported ADEs show a largerfemale skew than healthcare provider-reported ADEs and that the sex disparity ismarkedly smaller for outcomes involving death or hospitalization. We also find that thesex disparity varies greatly across types of ADEs, for example, cosmetically salientADEs are skewed heavily female and sexual dysfunction ADEs are skewed male.Together, we interpret these findings as providing evidence of the promise of theGender Hypothesis for identifying intervenable mechanisms and pathways contributingto sex disparities in ADEs. Rigorous application of the Gender Hypothesis to additionaldatasets and in future research studies could yield new insights into the causes of sexdisparities in ADEs. (Open Access: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116385)},
	url = { https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116385},
	author = {Katharine Mn Lee and Rushovich, Tamara and Annika Gompers and Marion Boulicault and Worthington, Steven and Jeffrey W Lockhart and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {704066,
	title = {Adverse Drug Events by Sex After Adjusting for Baseline Rates of Drug Use},
	journal = {JAMA Network Open},
	year = {2023},
	abstract = {
	Data from pharmacovigilance databases like the U.S. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) are widely cited as evidence for claims that women experience adverse drug events (ADEs) at as high as twice the rate of men. Biological factors are typically hypothesized to explain these sex differences. However, many factors could influence the distribution of ADE reports by sex, including well-known disparities in the rates at which men and women use prescribed drugs. This study examined ADEs reported by sex in the FAERS database after adjusting for drug use by men and women, finding that adjusting pharmacovigilance data from FAERS with nationally representative data on sex disparities in usage of drugs greatly attenuates the apparent sex disparity in ADE reports, reducing the gap in the median number of ADEs for women compared to men from 45.1\% to 15.0\%. The commonly cited claim that women experience 1.5 to 2 times the number of ADEs as men was demonstrated to be highly unlikely, with a probability of less than 5\% after accounting for drug usage. After accounting for underlying drug use, reported numbers of ADE were similar between men and women when looking across drugs, suggesting that gender/sex disparities in drug use may largely explain observed gender/sex disparities in ADEs. Rushovich, Gompers, and Lockhart are co-first authors of this publication, and the article is available Open Access.

},
	url = {https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2808556},
	author = {Rushovich, Tamara and Annika Gompers and Jeffrey W. Lockhart and Ife Omidiran and Worthington, Steven and Sarah S. Richardson and Katharine Mn Lee}
}
@article {700226,
	title = {Women{\textquoteright}s Health, Inc},
	journal = {The Lancet},
	volume = {401},
	number = {10384},
	year = {2023},
	pages = {1258-1259},
	abstract = {Across the globe, health care is increasingly in the hands of corporate entities. Women{\textquoteright}s health is a vivid example of this trend. Private equity firms, start-ups, and other private-sector companies are streaming into women{\textquoteright}s health, appealing to its historical aims of equity, empowerment, and social justice, while also expecting big profits. As this industry expands, tensions between profitability, innovation, quality, and equity are already surfacing within the USA, signalling what other nations may soon encounter.},
	url = {https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)00736-5/fulltext},
	author = {Joseph Dov Bruch and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {696001,
	title = {Making a {\textquoteleft}sex-difference fact{\textquoteright}: Ambien dosing at the interface of policy, regulation, women{\textquoteright}s health, and biology},
	journal = {Social Studies of Science},
	year = {2023},
	abstract = {The U.S. Food and Drug Administration{\textquoteright}s (FDA) 2013 decision to lower recommended Ambien dosing for women has been widely cited as a hallmark example of the importance of sex differences in biomedicine. Using regulatory documents, scientific publications, and media coverage, this article analyzes the making of this highly influential and mobile {\textquoteleft}sex-difference fact{\textquoteright}. As we show, the FDA{\textquoteright}s decision was a contingent outcome of the drug approval process. Attending to how a contested sex-difference fact came to anchor elite women{\textquoteright}s health advocacy, this article excavates the role of regulatory processes, advocacy groups, and the media in producing perceptions of scientific agreement while foreclosing ongoing debate, ultimately enabling the stabilization of a binary, biological sex-difference fact and the distancing of this fact from its conditions of construction.\&nbsp;},
	url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03063127231168371},
	author = {Helen Zhao and DiMarco, Marina and Ichikawa, Kelsey and Marion Boulicault and Meg Perret and Kai Jillson and Alexandra Fair and Kai DeJesus and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@inbook {685931,
	title = {Intersectionality as Live Theory and Practice in the Biomedical Sciences},
	booktitle = {The Routledge Companion to Intersectionalities},
	year = {2023},
	abstract = {"Within the sciences, there are increasing calls for incorporating intersectionality as a theoretical framework in the development of research questions and in methodological approaches. When we consider our recent research experiences, the primary question that arises is not whether quantitative fields can effectively incorporate intersectionality methodologically. Rather, it is whether these disciplines are prepared to expand their definitions of ways of knowing so as to create space for intersectional analysis in the STEM fields."\&nbsp;},
	author = {Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Marion Boulicault and Rushovich, Tamara and Sarah S. Richardson},
	editor = {Jennifer C. Nash and Samantha Pinto}
}
@article {695823,
	title = {Contextualismo sexual},
	journal = {An{\'a}lisis Filos{\'o}fico},
	volume = {42},
	number = {2},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {387-412},
	abstract = {En este art{\'\i}culo se desarrolla el marco conceptual del {\textquotedblleft}contextualismo sexual{\textquotedblright} para el estudio de las variables relacionadas con el sexo en la investigaci{\'o}n biom{\'e}dica. El contextualismo sexual ofrece una alternativa a los enfoques sexuales binarios y esencialistas del estudio del sexo como variable biol{\'o}gica. Espec{\'\i}ficamente, el contextualismo sexual reconoce el pluralismo y la especificidad contextual que tienen las operacionalizaciones de {\textquotedblleft}sexo{\textquotedblright} a trav{\'e}s de la investigaci{\'o}n experimental de laboratorio. A la luz de recientes normativas para la consideraci{\'o}n del sexo como variable biol{\'o}gica, el contextualismo sexual ofrece una gu{\'\i}a constructiva a los/as investigadores/as biom{\'e}dicos/as para abordar la variaci{\'o}n biol{\'o}gica relacionada con el sexo. En tanto alternativa y cr{\'\i}tica al esencialismo binario del sexo biol{\'o}gico, el contextualismo sexual contribuye a los debates actuales en filosof{\'\i}a de la biolog{\'\i}a, estudios feministas de la ciencia y ontolog{\'\i}a social en torno a la construcci{\'o}n de categor{\'\i}as de la diferencia sexual/gen{\'e}rica en la investigaci{\'o}n cient{\'\i}fica.},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.36446/af.2022.687},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson},
	editor = {Grupo de Investigaci{\'o}n en Epistemolog{\'\i}a Feminista (SADAF)}
}
@article {695539,
	title = {How Cumulative Statistics Can Mislead: The Temporal Dynamism of Sex Disparities in COVID-19 Mortality in New York State},
	journal = {International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health},
	volume = {19},
	number = {21},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {14066},
	abstract = {Overall, men have died from COVID-19 at slightly higher rates than women. But cumulative estimates of mortality by sex may be misleading. We analyze New York State COVID-19 mortality by sex between March 2020 and August 2021, demonstrating that 72.7\% of the total difference in the number of COVID-19 deaths between women and men was accrued in the first seven weeks of the pandemic. Thus, while the initial surge in COVID-19 mortality was characterized by stark sex disparities, this article shows that disparities were greatly attenuated in subsequent phases of the pandemic. Investigating changes over time could help illuminate how contextual factors contributed to the development of apparent sex disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. [Open Access]},
	url = {https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14066},
	author = {Danielsen, Ann Caroline and Marion Boulicault and Annika Gompers and Rushovich, Tamara and Lee, Katharine M. N. and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {690212,
	title = {Law, policy, biology, and sex: Critical issues for researchers},
	journal = {Science},
	volume = {376},
	number = {6595},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {802-804},
	abstract = {The interplay between legal and bioscientific understandings of sex is prolific and complex. Biological evidence and reasoning circulate in lawmaking and policy-making across an array of politically contested issues, including health care, education, and LGBTQI+ rights and protections. There is often a substantial disjoint, however, between how scientists define and operationalize sex differences in their research and how lawmakers and policy-makers make sense of these definitions and concepts as they strategically seek to bolster or challenge legal governance. Medical and life scientists who routinely incorporate sex-related variables in their research cannot eliminate superficial or malicious misuse of research by lawmakers and policy-makers, but awareness of the legal and policy landscape can clarify the possible downstream consequences of researchers{\textquoteright} choices about how to operationalize sex-related variables in their studies.},
	url = {DOI: 10.1126/science.abo1102},
	author = {Sudai, Maayan and Alexander Borsa and Ichikawa, Kelsey and Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Helen Zhao and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {687342,
	title = {Why {\textquoteright}sex as a biological variable{\textquoteright} conflicts with precision medicine initiatives},
	journal = {Cell Reports Medicine},
	volume = {3},
	number = {2},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {100550},
	abstract = {
	Policies that require male-female sex comparisons in all areas of biomedical research conflict with the goal of improving health outcomes through context-sensitive individualization of medical care. Sex, like race, requires a rigorous, contextual approach in precision medicine. A {\textquotedblleft}sex contextualist{\textquotedblright} approach to gender-inclusive medicine better aligns with this aim. 

},
	url = {https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(22)00056-8},
	author = {DiMarco, Marina and Helen Zhao and Marion Boulicault and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {DANIELSEN2022114716,
	title = {Sex disparities in COVID-19 outcomes in the United States: Quantifying and contextualizing variation},
	journal = {Social Science \& Medicine},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {114716},
	abstract = {This paper presents the first longitudinal study of sex disparities in COVID-19 cases and mortalities across U.S. states, derived from the unique 13-month dataset of the U.S. Gender/Sex COVID-19 Data Tracker. To analyze sex disparities, weekly case and mortality rates by sex and mortality rate ratios and rate differences were computed for each U.S. state, and a multilevel crossed-effects conditional logistic binomial regression model was fitted to estimate the variation of the sex disparity in mortality over time and across states. Results demonstrate considerable variation in the sex disparity in COVID-19 cases and mortalities over time and between states. These data suggest that the sex disparity, when present, is modest, and likely varies in relation to context-sensitive variables, which may include health behaviors, preexisting health status, occupation, race/ethnicity, and other markers of social experience.},
	keywords = {Biological essentialism, Covid-19, gender, Sex disparities},
	issn = {0277-9536},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114716},
	url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622000193},
	author = {Danielsen, Ann Caroline and Katharine Mn Lee and Marion Boulicault and Rushovich, Tamara and Annika Gompers and Tarrant, Amelia and Reiches, Meredith and Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Luke Weisman Miratrix and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {669238,
	title = {Sex Contextualism},
	journal = {Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology},
	volume = {14},
	number = {2},
	year = {2022},
	month = {2021},
	pages = {doi.org/10.3998/ptpbio.2096},
	abstract = {
	This paper develops the conceptual framework of {\textquotedblleft}sex contextualism{\textquotedblright} for the study of sex-related variables in biomedical research. Sex contextualism offers an alternative to binary sex essentialist approaches to the study of sex as a biological variable. Specifically, sex contextualism recognizes the pluralism and context-specificity of operationalizations of {\textquoteleft}sex{\textquoteright} across experimental laboratory research. In light of recent policy mandates to consider sex as a biological variable, sex contextualism offers constructive guidance to biomedical researchers for attending to sex-related biological variation. As an alternative to and critique of biological binary sex essentialism, sex contextualism contributes to current debates in philosophy of biology, feminist science studies, and social ontology on the construction of categories of gender/sex differences in scientific research.

},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.3998/ptpbio.2096},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {685056,
	title = {Are COVID-19 Case Fatality Rates a Reliable Measure of Sex Disparities?},
	journal = {Women{\textquoteright}s Health Issues},
	volume = {Available online 26 November 2021},
	year = {2021},
	abstract = {Gender/sex comparisons of COVID-19 case fatality rates are subject to systematic bias owing to differential testing rates. Nonrandom COVID-19 testing in the population means that there is considerable uncertainty around CFR estimates in men and women. Specifically, widespread lower testing among men compared with women likely artificially inflates the CFR among men, as demonstrated by a predictive, inverse relationship between testing skew and CFR ratio. The more disparate testing becomes between men and women, the\&nbsp;greater the observed sex disparity in CFR; when testing\&nbsp;becomes more similar, observed CFRs become more similar.\&nbsp;The case study of COVID-19 offers an important teachable and generalizable example for women{\textquoteright}s health scholars of the caution that is needed in interpreting sex disparities in CFRs.},
	url = {https://authors.elsevier.com/c/1eG8m3kcbYlC5T},
	author = {Annika Gompers and Joseph D. Bruch and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {penkler_jacob_m{\"u}ller_kenney_norris_da costa_richardson_roseboom_hanson_2021,
	title = {Developmental Origins of Health and Disease, Resilience and Social Justice in the COVID era},
	journal = {Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease},
	year = {2021},
	pages = {1{\textendash}4},
	publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	abstract = {A collaboration between scholars in history and social studies of science and leading DOHaD scientists, this article argues\&nbsp;that in a world of extreme inequalities, we need a science of DOHaD that attends to how factors that influence the development of health and disease are socially patterned, shifting the focus from individual-level characteristics of the mother{\textendash}child dyad in early development (independent of fathers, partners and other caregivers), to complex social processes that stratify society over the life-course.\&nbsp;\&nbsp;},
	doi = {10.1017/S204017442100060X},
	author = {Penkler, Michael and Jacob, Chandni M and M{\"u}ller, Ruth and Kenney, Martha and Norris, Shane A. and da Costa, Clarissa P and Sarah S. Richardson and Roseboom, Tessa J. and Hanson, Mark}
}
@webarticle {674350,
	title = {The Doomsday Sperm Theory Embraced by the Far Right},
	journal = {Slate},
	number = {May 14},
	year = {2021},
	abstract = {We explain and contextualize our new study out in\&nbsp;Human Fertility\&nbsp;in this essay for\&nbsp;Slate.},
	url = {https://slate.com/technology/2021/05/sperm-counts-decline-fertility-science-white-nationalism.html},
	author = {Alexander Borsa and Marion Boulicault and Reiches, Meredith and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {673999,
	title = {A finding of sex similarities rather than differences in COVID-19 outcomes},
	journal = {Nature},
	year = {2021},
	abstract = {
	The sex disparity in COVID-19 mortality varies widely and is of uncertain origin. In their recent Nature paper {\textquotedblleft}Sex differences in immune responses that underlie COVID-19 disease outcomes,{\textquotedblright} Takahashi et al. assess immune phenotype in a sample of COVID-19 patients and conclude that the {\textquotedblleft}immune landscape in COVID-19 patients is considerably different between the sexes,{\textquotedblright}\&nbsp;warranting different vaccine and therapeutic regimes for men and women -- a claim widely disseminated following the publication.\&nbsp;Here, we argue that these inferences are not supported by their findings: this study does not demonstrate that biological sex explains COVID-19 outcomes among patients. This study is diagnostic of an ongoing pattern in sex difference research of overstatement of findings and superficial treatment of factors beyond innate sex in analyzing the causes of gender/sex disparities in health outcomes.

},
	author = {Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Danielsen, Ann Caroline and Annika Gompers and Joseph Dov Bruch and Helen Zhao and Marion Boulicault and Jamie Marsella and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {673515,
	title = {The future of sperm: A biovariability framework for understanding global sperm count trends},
	journal = {Human Fertility},
	volume = {DOI 10.1080/14647273.2021.1917778},
	year = {2021},
	abstract = {The past 50 years have seen heated debate in the reproductive sciences about global trends in human sperm count. In 2017, Levine and colleagues published the most methodologically rigorous and largest meta-regression analysis to date and reported that average total sperm concentration among men from {\textquotedblleft}Western{\textquotedblright} countries has decreased by 59.3\% since 1973, with no sign of halting. These results reverberated in the scientific community and in public discussions about men and masculinity in the modern world, in part because of scientists{\textquoteright} public-facing claims about the societal implications of the decline of male fertility. We find that existing research follows a set of implicit and explicit assumptions about how to measure and interpret sperm counts, which collectively form what we term the Sperm Count Decline hypothesis (SCD). Using the study by Levine and colleagues, we identify weaknesses and inconsistencies in the SCD, and propose an alternative framework to guide research on sperm count trends, the Sperm Count Biovariability hypothesis (SCB). SCB asserts that sperm count varies within a wide range, much of which can be considered non-pathological and species-typical. Knowledge about the relationship between individual and population sperm count and life-historical and ecological factors is critical to interpreting trends in average sperm counts and their relationships to health and fertility.},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2021.1917778},
	author = {Marion Boulicault and Meg Perret and Jonathan Galka and Alex Borsa and Annika Gompers and Reiches, Meredith and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {673030,
	title = {Sex Disparities in COVID-19 Mortality Vary Across US Racial Groups},
	journal = {Journal of General Internal Medicine},
	volume = {DOI 10.1007/s11606-021-06699-4},
	year = {2021},
	abstract = {
	This study shows that Black women are dying of COVID-19 at rates higher than men in other racial/ethnic groups. The study is the first to quantify the inequities in COVID-19 mortality looking at both race and sex group and analyzing the sex-disparity in COVID-19 mortality across racial groups. It shows that Black women are dying at significantly higher rates than white men, and that disparities in mortality rates among women of all races are greater than those between white women and white men, complicating the simple narrative that men are dying at greater rates of COVID-19 than women.



	Results show that the common belief that men with COVID-19 fare more poorly than women varies in magnitude across social groups defined by race/ethnicity. Key findings of the study include: 



	
		Black women have COVID-19 mortality rates that are almost 4 times higher than that of white men and 3 times higher than that of Asian men, as well as higher than white and Asian women.
	
	
		Black men have far higher mortality rates than any other sex and racial group, including over 6 times higher than the rate among white men. 
	
	
		The disparity in mortality rates between Black women and white women is over 3 times the disparity between white men and white women. 
	
	
		The disparity between Black men and Black women is larger than the disparity between white men and white women.
	



	Study methods: This study used census data and publicly available data from Michigan and Georgia, the only two states reporting data disaggregated by age, race, and sex, to calculate and compare COVID-19 mortality rates. 

},
	url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-021-06699-4},
	author = {Rushovich, Tamara and Marion Boulicault and Jarvis T. Chen and Danielsen, Ann Caroline and Tarrant, Amelia and Sarah S. Richardson and Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather}
}
@newspaperarticle {673024,
	title = {The intersection of Black women, COVID, and death rates: The narrative about sex differences and COVID-19 overshadows alarming facts},
	journal = {The Boston Globe},
	volume = {April 5},
	year = {2021},
	abstract = {
	Headlines like {\textquotedblleft}Battle of the Sexes Against COVID-19{\textquotedblright} frame sex disparities in COVID-19 outcomes as a matter of essential biological differences between the sexes. Our findings support a contrary view, that biological factors at best play a small role. Rather,\&nbsp;social factors\&nbsp;influenced by\&nbsp;structural gendered racism\&nbsp;are key to the patterns of sex disparities revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings caution against public health messaging emphasizing a higher COVID-19 risk among men that does not also include social context.

},
	url = {https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/04/05/opinion/black-women-are-dying-covid-19-higher-rates-than-almost-every-other-group/},
	author = {Rushovich, Tamara and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@book {325411,
	title = {The Maternal Imprint: The Contested Science of Maternal-Fetal Effects},
	year = {2021},
	publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
	organization = {University of Chicago Press},
	address = {Chicago},
	abstract = {
	The Maternal Imprint charts the\&nbsp;history of the idea that a woman{\textquoteright}s health and behavior during pregnancy can have long-term effects on her descendants{\textquoteright} health and welfare.The idea that a woman may leave a biological trace on her gestating offspring has long been a commonplace folk intuition and a matter of scientific intrigue, but the form of that idea{\textemdash}and its staggering implications for maternal well-being and reproductive autonomy{\textemdash}has changed dramatically over time. Beginning with the advent of modern genetics at the turn of the twentieth century, biomedical scientists dismissed any notion that a mother{\textemdash}except in cases of extreme deprivation or injury{\textemdash}could alter her offspring{\textquoteright}s traits. Consensus asserted that a child{\textquoteright}s fate was set by a combination of its genes and post-birth upbringing.\&nbsp;\&nbsp;Over the last fifty years, however, this consensus was dismantled, and today, research on the intrauterine environment and its effects on the fetus is emerging as a robust program of study in medicine, public health, psychology, evolutionary biology, and genomics. Collectively, these sciences argue that a woman{\textquoteright}s experiences, behaviors, and physiology can have life-altering effects on offspring development. Tracing a genealogy of ideas about heredity and maternal-fetal effects,\&nbsp;The Maternal Imprint\&nbsp;offers a critical analysis of conceptual and ethical issues provoked by the striking rise of epigenetics and fetal origins science in postgenomic biology today.

},
	url = {https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo117202096.html},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@webarticle {667437,
	title = {Socially Relevant Variables In US State COVID-19 Surveillance Reporting: A Report Card },
	journal = {Health Affairs Blog},
	number = {July 14},
	year = {2020},
	abstract = {The Harvard GenderSci Lab developed a scoring scheme and\&nbsp;Report Card\&nbsp;to evaluate\&nbsp;the comprehensiveness of socially relevant, intersectional data publicly reported by each state.\&nbsp; We scored each state on their reporting of selected socially relevant variables (age, sex/gender, race/ethnicity, and comorbidity status), and on reporting of interactions between these variables.\&nbsp; The results document the paucity of comprehensive disaggregated COVID-19 surveillance reporting among states. Only three states received an {\textquotedblleft}A{\textquotedblright}, while 30 states received a {\textquotedblleft}D{\textquotedblright} grade or lower.},
	url = {https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200710.964611/full/},
	author = {Boulicault, M. and Danielsen, A. C. and Bruch, J. and Tarrant, A. and Borsa, A. and S. Richardson}
}
@article {666901,
	title = {First Authorship Gender Gap in the Geosciences},
	journal = {Earth and Space Science},
	volume = {7},
	number = {8},
	year = {2020},
	pages = {e2020EA001203},
	abstract = {
	Although gender parity has been reached at the graduate level in the geosciences, women remain a minority in faculty positions. First authorship of peer-reviewed scholarship is a measure of academic success and is often used to project potential in the hiring process. Given the importance of first author publications for hiring and advancement, we sought to quantify whether women are underrepresented as first authors relative to their representation in the field of geoscience. We compiled first author names across 13 leading geoscience journals from January 2013 to April 2019 (n 1{\textfractionsolidus}4 35,183). Using a database of 216,286 names from 79 countries, across 89 languages, we classified the likely gender associated with each author{\textquoteright}s given (first) name. We also estimated the gender distribution of authors who publish using only initials, which may itself be a strategy employed by some women to preempt perceived (and actual) gender bias in the publication process. Female names represent 13{\textendash}30\% of all first authors in our database and are substantially underrepresented relative to the proportion of women in early career positions (30{\textendash}50\%). The proportion of female-name first authors varies substantially by subfield, reflecting variation in representation of women across geoscience subdisciplines. In geoscience, the quantification of this first authorship gender gap supports the hypothesis that the publication process{\textemdash}namely, achievement or allocation of first authorship{\textemdash}is biased by social factors, which may modulate career success of women in the sciences.

},
	url = {https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2020EA001203$\#$:~:text=In\%20geoscience\%2C\%20the\%20quantification\%20of,of\%20women\%20in\%20the\%20sciences.},
	author = {Tamara Pico and Paul Bierman and Kevin Doyle and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@webarticle {666900,
	title = {When private equity firms invest in women{\textquoteright}s health clinics, who benefits? },
	journal = {STAT},
	number = {Sep. 14},
	year = {2020},
	abstract = {
	The increasing influence of private equity in a range of health care delivery settings such as\&nbsp;physician staffing,\&nbsp;nursing homes, and\&nbsp;hospitals\&nbsp;is not new. But our research reveals a precipitous rise of private equity activity in women{\textquoteright}s health. The recent rise of private equity in this area marks a novel form of investor attention with unknown implications.\&nbsp;To determine how the incentives of private equity firms interact with clinicians{\textquoteright} mission of caring for women, policymakers, researchers, and the general public need to stay vigilant. Deals between private equity firms and health care providers should be transparent, and ethical standards should be put in place to ensure that profits don{\textquoteright}t get in the way of people, and that patients are able to access comprehensive, equitable, and affordable care.

},
	url = {https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/14/private-equity-firms-invest-womens-health-clinics-who-benefits/},
	author = {Alexander Borsa and Joseph Bruch and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {666899,
	title = {Expansion of Private Equity Involvement in Women{\textquoteright}s Health Care},
	journal = {JAMA Internal Medicine},
	volume = {180},
	number = {11},
	year = {2020},
	pages = {1542{\textendash}1545},
	abstract = {
	We document formerly non{\textendash}private equity women{\textquoteright}s health care companies, including physician networks, practices, and fertility clinics, that gained a private equity affiliation between 2010 and 2019. This analysis\&nbsp;shows a substantial increase in private equity affiliations in women{\textquoteright}s health care since 2017. Private equity{\textendash}affiliated OB/GYN offices are located in urban locations, with an average 2017 median household income 24\% higher than the 2017 national average.\&nbsp;How the incentives of private equity firms interact with the clinical mission of women{\textquoteright}s health is a critical area of inquiry. Future debate about private equity in women{\textquoteright}s health will likely be shaped by the associations between economic incentives and quality of care, elective or cosmetic procedures, and access to reproductive health services, especially among low-income, LGBTQIA, and other disadvantaged populations.



	Commentary:\&nbsp;Private Equity, Women{\textquoteright}s Health, and the Corporate Transformation of American Medicine

},
	url = {doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.3567},
	author = {Joseph D. Bruch and Alexander Borsa and Zirui Song and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {666898,
	title = {Analyzing COVID-19 Sex Difference Claims: The Harvard GenderSci Lab},
	journal = {APA Newsletter on Feminism and Philosophy},
	volume = {20},
	number = {1},
	year = {2020},
	pages = {3-7},
	abstract = {Since March 2020, our group at the Harvard GenderSci Lab has been critiquing sex essentialist explanations of COVID-19 outcome disparities. Using interdisciplinary tools from feminist philosophy, science studies, and critical public health, we work collaboratively to critically examine COVID-19 sex-difference research and to explore and elevate the role of social variables in driving biological disparities. We argue that, in public health research and messaging, data on sex disparities must be contextualized to avoid reinforcing harmful sex essentialist assumptions and to help the public understand how social factors influence these patterns. In the case of COVID-19, doing so can clarify risks and save lives. Here, we describe our methods and share some of our findings.},
	url = {https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.apaonline.org/resource/collection/D03EBDAB-82D7-4B28-B897-C050FDC1ACB4/FeminismCovidSpecialIssueV20n1.pdf},
	author = {Marion Boulicault and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@newspaperarticle {666897,
	title = {What{\textquoteright}s Really Behind the Gender Gap in Covid-19 Deaths?},
	journal = {The New York Times},
	number = {June 24},
	year = {2020},
	abstract = {A few months into the first wave of the Covid-19 epidemic, men in aggregate appear to have higher fatality rates. But ascribing this outcome to biological sex-related variables, as some have rushed to do, is unlikely to lead to effective interventions. In past epidemics, what at first appeared to be a sex difference turned out to be largely a result of the difference in life experiences between women and men. Occupations, behaviors and pre-existing conditions mattered more than whether one was a woman or a man.},
	url = {https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/opinion/sex-differences-covid.html},
	author = {Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Meredith W. Reiches and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@webarticle {666896,
	title = {We Dug Into Data to Disprove a Myth About Women in STEM},
	journal = {Slate},
	number = {Feb. 11},
	year = {2020},
	abstract = {
	The argument used to be that women were simply biologically less capable. Now it{\textquoteright}s that they{\textquoteright}re less interested. Both are wrong.

},
	url = {https://slate.com/technology/2020/02/women-stem-innate-disinterest-debunked.html},
	author = {Reiches, Meredith and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {doi:10.1177/0956797619872762,
	title = {Is There a Gender-Equality Paradox in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM)? Commentary on the Study by Stoet and Geary (2018)},
	journal = {Psychological Science},
	year = {2020},
	pages = {0956797619872762},
	doi = {10.1177/0956797619872762},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619872762},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson and Meredith W. Reiches and Joe Bruch and Marion Boulicault and Nicole E. Noll and Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather}
}
@article {644598,
	title = {Genome studies must account for history},
	journal = {Science},
	volume = {366},
	number = {6472},
	year = {2019},
	pages = {1461},
	author = {Richardson, S. S. Borsa, A. Boulicault, M. Galka, J. Ghosh, N. Gompers, A. Noll, N. E. Perret, M. Reiches, M. W. Sandoval, J. C.}
}
@newspaperarticle {636150,
	title = {Focusing on differences between the sexes is leading medical researchers astray},
	journal = {The Washington Post},
	number = {30 May},
	year = {2019},
	abstract = {The sleep drug zolpidem (Ambien) is a leading example used by advocates of sex-based medicine. In this Op-Ed, Heather Shattuck-Heidorn and I argue that there is no evidence for sex differences in zolpidem dosing -- and that the paradigmatic example of zolpidem is actually a cautionary tale of the dangers of an overfocus on sex differences.},
	url = {https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/30/focusing-differences-between-sexes-is-leading-medical-researchers-astray/?utm_term=.8267ed6587b5},
	author = {Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {633180,
	title = {Time to cut the cord: recognizing and addressing the imbalance of DOHaD research towards the study of maternal pregnancy exposures},
	journal = {Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease},
	volume = {DOI: 10.1017/S2040174419000072},
	number = {Epub: 2019/03/08},
	year = {2019},
	pages = {1-4},
	abstract = {Fifteen years ago, the society that produces this journal was established to advance research on the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD). But, as we show here, extending our previous work, DOHaD research has been more concerned with exposures in the\&nbsp;fetal\&nbsp;period than in any other window of development. This interest manifests as an abundance of studies on the potential effects of the health and lifestyle of mothers around the time of pregnancy on the health of their children. We argue that this focus reflects deeply-held assumptions, among researchers, clinicians, policy makers, the media and the public, that maternal pregnancy exposures are the most important, causal determinants of offspring health. We call for the DOHaD research community to recognize and challenge these assumptions.},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.1017/S2040174419000072},
	author = {Sharp, G.C. and Schellhas, L. and Richardson, S. S. and Lawlor, D. A.}
}
@article {614030,
	title = {Sex/Gender and the Biosocial Turn},
	journal = {The Scholar and Feminist Online},
	volume = {15},
	number = {2},
	year = {2019},
	abstract = {In this essay, we pose the biosocial turn as presenting an opportunity to creatively expand the range of empirical inquiries into gender as a biosocial variable and to newly articulate the importance of attending to gender in biological science.\&nbsp;Feminist scientists and science theorists, we argue, would do well to engage the reservoir of innovative new biosocial research as a resource for developing methods and theories for the study of sex/gender. Similarly, we call on biosocial scientists to attend as assiduously to gender as they have to other intersecting foci of analysis, such as racial discrimination and socioeconomic disadvantage.},
	url = {http://sfonline.barnard.edu/neurogenderings/sex-gender-and-the-biosocial-turn/},
	author = {Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@webarticle {625924,
	title = {Transphobia, Cloaked in Science},
	journal = {Los Angeles Review of Books},
	number = {Nov. 11},
	year = {2018},
	abstract = {Decades of research across scientific disciplines have built an understanding of human sex as a multidimensional trait with biological and social components\&nbsp;that can vary over the life course. Against this\&nbsp;scientific consensus, the proposed HHS definition marshals bits and pieces of biology in order to exclude millions of transgender citizens\&nbsp;{\textemdash} whose sexual or gender identity often does not match their natal genitals {\textemdash} from civil rights protections.},
	url = {https://blog.lareviewofbooks.org/essays/transphobia-cloaked-science/},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {614032,
	title = {It{\textquoteright}s the Mother!: How Assumptions about the Causal Primacy of Maternal Effects Influence Research on the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease},
	journal = {Social Science and Medicine},
	volume = {213},
	number = {September},
	year = {2018},
	pages = {20-27},
	abstract = {Research on the developmental origins of health and disease (DOHaD) has traditionally focused on how maternal exposures around the time of pregnancy might influence offspring health and risk of disease. We acknowledge that for some exposures this is likely to be correct, but argue that the focus on maternal pregnancy effects also reflects implicit and deeply-held assumptions that 1) causal early life exposures are primarily transmitted via maternal traits or exposures, 2) maternal exposures around the time of pregnancy and early infancy are particularly important, and 3) other factors, such as paternal factors and postnatal exposures in later life, have relatively little impact in comparison. These implicit assumptions about the {\textquotedblleft}causal primacy{\textquotedblright} of maternal pregnancy effects set the agenda for DOHaD research and, through a looping effect, are reinforced rather than tested. We propose practical strategies to redress this imbalance through maintaining a critical perspective about these assumptions.},
	url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953618303927},
	author = {Sharp, Gemma and Lawlor, Debbie and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {564541,
	title = {The biosocial genome? Interdisciplinary perspectives on environmental epigenetics, health and society},
	journal = {EMBO Reports},
	volume = {Published online 20.09.2017},
	year = {2017},
	url = {http://embor.embopress.org/content/early/2017/09/20/embr.201744953.full},
	author = {M{\"u}ller, Ruth, et al.}
}
@article {400741,
	title = {Plasticity and Programming: Feminism and the Epigenetic Imaginary},
	journal = {Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society },
	volume = {43},
	number = {1},
	year = {2017},
	month = {2017},
	pages = {29-52},
	abstract = {
	My answer to the question: What are the implications of epigenetic science for theories of the plasticity of human sex, gender, and sexuality?



	Abstract: The new science of epigenetics has raised hopes of an embrace of greater plasticity and variation within the biology of sex, gender, and sexuality than previously appreciated.\&nbsp; This essay describes and analyzes the integration of epigenetics research into the scientific study of core biological pathways related to sex, gender, and sexuality in the brain in the post-Human Genome Project era.\&nbsp; Through a close reading of the primary scientific literature, it demonstrates that epigenetic approaches in this subfield remain continuous with historically well-entrenched models of hardwired brain sexual dimorphism.\&nbsp; Considering the opportunities and dilemmas of feminist engagements with the fast-moving and still nascent field of epigenetics,\&nbsp;it argues that while epigenetics might become a resource for studies of the development and plasticity of gender-sexed bodies and identities, this will require active feminist contestations of the ontological and epistemological commitments of mainstream research in this field.\&nbsp; Feminist attraction to the possibilities for epigenetic research to enable material investigation of gender embodiment and sexual variation follow a long tradition of feminist theoretical interest in plasticity-affirming biologies.\&nbsp; Careful consideration of the case of epigenetics suggests a need for revised and more nuanced feminist appraisals of both plasticity-affirming and programming-centric models of biology, body, and sociality. \&nbsp;

},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {453101,
	title = {Sex in Context: Limitations of Animal Studies for Addressing Human Sex/Gender Neurobehavioral Health Disparities},
	journal = {Journal of Neuroscience},
	volume = {36},
	number = {47},
	year = {2016},
	month = {23 Nov, 2016},
	pages = {11823-11830},
	abstract = {Many brain and behavioral disorders differentially affect men and women. The new National Institutes of Health requirement to include both male and female animals in preclinical studies aims to address such health disparities, but we argue that the mandate is not the best solution to this problem. Sex differences are highly species-specific, tied to the mating system and social ecology of a given species or even strain of animal. In many cases, animals poorly replicate male-female differences in brain-related human diseases. Sex/gender disparities in human health have a strong sociocultural component that is intimately entangled with biological sex and challenging to model in animals. We support research that investigates sex-related variables in hypothesis-driven studies of animal brains and behavior. However, institutional policies that require sex analysis and give it special salience over other sources of biological variance can distort research. We caution that the costly imposition of sex analysis on nearly all animal research entrenches the presumption that human brain and behavioral differences are largely biological in origin and overlooks the potentially more powerful social, psychological, and cultural contributors to male-female neurobehavioral health gaps.},
	url = {http://www.jneurosci.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/content/36/47/11823},
	author = {Eliot, Lise and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@webarticle {400761,
	title = {The CDC Risks its Credibility with New Pregnancy Guidelines},
	journal = {The Boston Globe},
	number = {8 Feb., 2016},
	year = {2016},
	abstract = {Women are constantly bombarded with advice about what to eat and drink and how to behave during pregnancy. Rather than add to this growing roster with yet another simplistic injunction, the CDC should do everything it can to provide women with credible information about how to weigh reproductive risks.},
	url = {https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/02/08/the-cdc-risks-its-credibility-with-new-pregnancy-guidelines/2SCHzNCqcWNDRguol7kzwK/story.html},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson and Almeling, Rene}
}
@webarticle {400756,
	title = {Sex and Gender in a Petri Dish},
	journal = {Nursing Clio},
	number = {7 Jan. 2016},
	year = {2016},
	month = {7 Jan. 2016},
	abstract = {Will requiring study of sex in basic laboratory research produce meaningful and relevant science for remedying health disparities between men and women? Our Harvard-based working group of feminist scientists and science studies scholars spent a year reading and discussing the primary documentation supporting the new policy. In a\&nbsp;recent article\&nbsp;in\&nbsp;Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences, we argue that as an approach to addressing health disparities between men and women in adverse drug events, the policy is misguided.},
	url = {https://nursingclio.org/2016/01/07/sex-and-gender-in-a-petri-dish/},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson and Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Consoli, Tess}
}
@article {323861,
	title = {Focus on Preclinical Sex Differences Will Not Address Women{\textquoteright}s and Men{\textquoteright}s Health Disparities},
	journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences},
	volume = {112},
	number = {44},
	year = {2015},
	pages = {13419{\textendash}13420},
	abstract = {The authors contend that requiring sex as a variable in preclinical studies will do little to mitigate human health disparities.\&nbsp;},
	url = {http://www.pnas.org/content/112/44/13419.full},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson and Reiches, Meredith and Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather and Labonte, Michelle Lynne and Consoli, Theresa}
}
@article {323856,
	title = {Is the New NIH Policy Good For Women?},
	journal = {Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, and Technoscience},
	volume = {1},
	number = {1},
	year = {2015},
	abstract = {"When the new NIH policy was first announced, comedian Stephen Colbert featured the news next to an image of a lab rat "co-ed" wearing lipstick and mascara. But a female rat{\textemdash}not to mention a cell line {\textemdash} is not an embodied woman living in a richly textured social world."},
	url = {http://catalystjournal.org/ojs/index.php/catalyst/article/view/labmeeting/135},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {323866,
	title = {The Trustworthiness Deficit in Postgenomic Research on Human Intelligence},
	journal = {The Genetics of Intelligence: Ethics and the Conduct of Trustworthy Research, special report, Hastings Center Report},
	volume = {45},
	number = {S1 Sept/Oct},
	year = {2015},
	pages = {S15-S20},
	abstract = {Should Baltimore{\textquoteright}s Center for Talented Youth share its alumni data with scientists studying the genomics of high intelligence? My answer to this real-life ethics scenario.},
	url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hast.2015.45.issue-S1/issuetoc},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@book {175611,
	title = {Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome},
	year = {2015},
	publisher = {Duke University Press},
	organization = {Duke University Press},
	address = {Durham; London},
	abstract = {Ten years after the Human Genome Project{\textquoteright}s completion, the life sciences stand in a moment of uncertainty, transition, and contestation. The {\textquotedblleft}postgenomic era{\textquotedblright} has seen rapid shifts in research methodology, funding, scientific labor, and disciplinary structures. Postgenomics is transforming our understanding of disease and health, our environment, and the categories of race, class, and gender. At the same time, {\textquotedblleft}the gene{\textquotedblright} retains its centrality and power in biological and popular discourse. The contributors to\&nbsp;Postgenomics\&nbsp;analyze these ruptures and continuities and place them in historical, social, and political context. Postgenomics, they argue, forces a rethinking of the genome itself, and opens new territory for conversations between the social sciences, humanities, and life sciences.},
	url = {http://www.amazon.com/dp/0822358948/ref=cm_sw_r_fa_dp_TO3Fub091JW3Q},
	editor = {Sarah S. Richardson and Hallam Stevens}
}
@inbook {138136,
	title = {Maternal Bodies in the Postgenomic Order: Gender and the Explanatory Landscape of Epigenetics},
	booktitle = {Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology After the Genome},
	year = {2015},
	publisher = {Duke University Press},
	organization = {Duke University Press},
	abstract = {This essay analyzes how maternal bodies are situated and valenced within the field of epigenetics. Epigenetics, the study of how experiences, environments, and exposures alter gene expression, is a vibrant new area of postgenomic life sciences research. Epigenetic research on maternal effects advances a model of human inheritance and development in which the wider social and physical environment can be seen as heritable and as a determinate of future biomedical outcomes via discrete biochemical modifications introduced by the amplifying vector of the maternal body. As an epigenetic vector, the maternal body is at once a background element, a medium for the fetus. Yet it is also a {\textquotedblleft}critical{\textquotedblright} developmental context in which environmental exposures are amplified, cues are transmitted, and genes are programmed. Epigenetics research situates the maternal body as a central site of epigenetic programming and transmission, and as a significant locus of medical and public health intervention. Reflection on epigenetics-based biomedical and public health interventions recommended by leading scientists suggests a need for sensitivity to how certain bodies or spaces become intensive targets of intervention when conceptualized as amplifying vectors of risk within the explanatory landscape of epigenetics.\&nbsp;},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson},
	editor = {Sarah S. Richardson and Hallam Stevens}
}
@webarticle {323871,
	title = {Egg Freezing Better for Companies Than Women},
	journal = {CNN.com},
	year = {2014},
	url = {http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/20/opinion/almeling-radin-richardson-egg-freezing/},
	author = {Almeling, Rene and Radin, Joanna and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@booklet {323881,
	title = {Reductionism},
	journal = {Encyclopedia of Bioethics},
	year = {2014},
	publisher = {Macmillan Reference/Cengage Learning},
	edition = {Fourth},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@webarticle {323876,
	title = {   Y All the Hype? A study about sexual similarity gets framed as a major new finding of sex difference},
	journal = {Slate.com},
	year = {2014},
	url = {http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/05/sex_difference_findings_in_human_genome_studies_be_very_skeptical.html},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {187126,
	title = {Don{\textquoteright}t Blame the Mothers},
	journal = {Nature},
	volume = {512},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {131-132},
	abstract = {Careless discussion of epigenetic research on how early life affects health across generations could harm women, warn Sarah S. Richardson and colleagues.},
	url = {http://www.nature.com/news/society-don-t-blame-the-mothers-1.15693?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20140814},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson and Cynthia R. Daniels and Matthew W. Gillman and Janet Golden and Rebecca Kukla and Christopher Kuzawa and Janet Rich-Edwards}
}
@article {138131,
	title = {Autism as a Biomedical Platform for Sex Difference Research},
	journal = {BioSocieties},
	volume = {9},
	number = {3},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {262-283},
	abstract = {Autism has become a {\textquotedblleft}biomedical platform{\textquotedblright} for sex difference research in fields such as genetics, endocrinology, and neuroscience. Increasingly, researchers in these fields pose the male prevalence of autism as a model for investigating sex differences in the brain, and offer basic research on sex differences in the brain as a resource for understanding the etiology of autism. The use of autism as a biomedical platform for sex difference research obscures empirical and interpretive contestations surrounding claims about the male prevalence of autism. We argue that the uncritical use of this research platform across many fields stands to distort scientific research on autism and contribute to harmful gender stereotypes.\&nbsp;
Featured in National Geographic {\textquotedblleft}Only Human{\textquotedblright} Blog, {\textquotedblleft}The Sexual Politics of Autism.{\textquotedblright}\&nbsp; July 11, 2014.\&nbsp;},
	author = {Gillis-Buck, Eva and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {555441,
	title = {Is Poverty in Our Genes?},
	journal = {Current Anthropology},
	volume = {54},
	number = {1},
	year = {2013},
	pages = {71-79},
	abstract = {We present a critique of a paper written by two economists, Quamrul Ashraf and Oded Galor, which is forthcoming in the\&nbsp;American Economic Review\&nbsp;and which was uncritically highlighted in\&nbsp;Science\&nbsp;magazine. Their paper claims there is a causal effect of genetic diversity on economic success, positing that too much or too little genetic diversity constrains development. In particular, they argue that {\textquotedblleft}the high degree of diversity among African populations and the low degree of diversity among Native American populations have been a detrimental force in the development of these regions.{\textquotedblright} We demonstrate that their argument is seriously flawed on both factual and methodological grounds. As economists and other social scientists begin exploring newly available genetic data, it is crucial to remember that nonexperts broadcasting bold claims on the basis of weak data and methods can have profoundly detrimental social and political effects.},
	url = {http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/669034},
	author = {Jade d{\textquoteright}Alpoim Guedes and et al.}
}
@book {92691,
	title = {Sex Itself: The Search for Male and Female in the Human Genome},
	year = {2013},
	publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
	organization = {University of Chicago Press},
	address = {Chicago and London},
	abstract = {Tracking the emergence of a new and distinctive way of thinking about sex represented by the unalterable, simple, and visually compelling binary of the X and Y chromosomes, Sex Itself examines the interaction between cultural gender norms and genetic theories of sex from the beginning of the twentieth century to the present, postgenomic age.\&nbsp;},
	url = {http://books.google.com/books?id=ze8LAQAAQBAJ\&lpg=PA278\&ots=TwyAXljewj\&dq=sex\%20itself\%20chicago\&pg=PP1$\#$v=onepage\&q\&f=false},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@website {323886,
	title = {The Genetics of Sex Determination: Rethinking Concepts and Theories},
	journal = {Gendered Innovations in Science, Health \& Medicine, Engineering, and Environment (genderedinnovations.stanford.edu)},
	year = {2012},
	abstract = {Case study for Gendered Innovations website. \&nbsp;How to cite:

Schiebinger, L., Klinge, I., S{\'a}nchez de Madariaga, I., Paik, H. Y., Schraudner, M., and Stefanick, M. (Eds.) (2011-2015). Gendered Innovations in Science, Health \&amp; Medicine, Engineering, and Environment (genderedinnovations.stanford.edu).
This website is peer-reviewed. All materials were developed in a series of Gendered Innovations Workshops and reviewed by experts (see\&nbsp;Contributors).
},
	url = {http://genderedinnovations.stanford.edu/case-studies/genetics.html},
	editor = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {92701,
	title = {Sexing the X: How the X became the {\textquoteleft}Female Chromosome{\textquoteright}},
	journal = {Signs},
	volume = {37},
	number = {4},
	year = {2012},
	pages = {909-933},
	abstract = {This essay examines how the X became the {\textquotedblleft}female chromosome{\textquotedblright} and how the association of the X with femaleness influences research questions, models, and descriptive language in human sex chromosome research. I trace how the X is gendered female in scientific and popular discourse; document the contingent technical, material, and ideological factors that led to the feminization of the X during the first decades of sex chromosome research; and track the introduction of the {\textquotedblleft}female chromosome{\textquotedblright} into human genetics at midcentury. In the second part of the essay, I document the continuing influence of the feminization of the X on genetic research, exemplified by {\textquotedblleft}X chromosome mosaicism{\textquotedblright} theories of female biology and behavior.},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {92706,
	title = {Race and IQ in the Postgenomic Age: The Microcephaly Case},
	journal = {BioSocieties},
	volume = {6},
	number = {4},
	year = {2011},
	pages = {420-446},
	abstract = {A convergence of contextual factors, technological platforms and research frameworks in the genomics of the human brain and cognition has generated a new postgenomic model for the study of race and IQ. Centered on the case study of Bruce T. Lahn{\textquoteright}s 2005 claims about the genomic basis of racial differences in brain size and IQ, this article maps the disciplinary terrain of this research, analyzes its central claims and examines the rigor of critical debate within the genomics community about new race and IQ research. New postgenomic race and IQ research, while displaying some continuities with previous eras of racial science, also differs in important ways, both contextual and conceptual. In particular, this new research draws on methods and hypotheses that are widely accepted across many fields of the contemporary molecular genetic sciences. This has implications for the forms of critical engagement that science studies scholars might pursue.},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {92711,
	title = {Feminist Philosophy of Science: History, Contributions, and Challenges},
	journal = {Synthese},
	volume = {177},
	number = {3},
	year = {2010},
	pages = {337-362},
	abstract = {Feminist philosophy of science has led to improvements in the practices and products of scientific knowledge-making, and in this way it exemplifies socially relevant philosophy of science. It has also yielded important insights and original research questions for philosophy. Feminist scholarship on science thus presents a worthy thought-model for considering how we might build a more socially relevant philosophy of science{\textemdash}the question posed by the editors of this special issue. In this analysis of the history, contributions, and challenges faced by feminist philosophy of science, I argue that engaged case study work and interdisciplinarity have been central to the success of feminist philosophy of science in producing socially relevant scholarship, and that its future lies in the continued development of robust and dynamic philosophical frameworks for modeling social values in science. Feminist philosophers of science, however, have often encountered marginalization and persistent misunderstandings, challenges that must be addressed within the institutional and intellectual culture of American philosophy.},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {92716,
	title = {Sexes, Species, and Genomes: Why Males and Females Are Not Like Humans and Chimpanzees},
	journal = {Biology and Philosophy},
	volume = {25},
	number = {5},
	year = {2010},
	pages = {823-841},
	abstract = {This paper describes, analyzes, and critiques the construction of separate {\textquotedblleft}male{\textquotedblright} and {\textquotedblleft}female{\textquotedblright} genomes in current human genome research. Comparative genomic work on human sex differences conceives of the sexes as like different species, with different genomes. I argue that this construct is empirically unsound, distortive to research, and ethically questionable. I propose a conceptual model of biological sex that clarifies the distinction between species and sexes as genetic classes. The dynamic interdependence of the sexes makes them {\textquotedblleft}dyadic kinds{\textquotedblright} that are not like species, which are {\textquotedblleft}individual kinds.{\textquotedblright} The concept of sex as a {\textquotedblleft}dyadic kind{\textquotedblright} may be fruitful as a remedy to the tendency to conceive of the sexes as distinct, binary classes in biological research on sex more generally.},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {92721,
	title = {The Left Vienna Circle, Part 1. Carnap, Neurath, and the Left Vienna Circle thesis},
	journal = {Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A},
	volume = {40},
	number = {1},
	year = {2009},
	pages = {14-24},
	abstract = {Recent scholarship resuscitates the history and philosophy of a {\textquoteleft}left wing{\textquoteright} in the Vienna Circle, offering a counterhistory to the conventional image of analytic philosophy as politically conformist. This paper disputes the historical claim that early logical empiricists developed a political philosophy of science. Though some individuals in the Vienna Circle, including Rudolf Carnap and Otto Neurath, believed strongly in the importance of science to social progress, they did not construct a political philosophy of science. Both Carnap and Neurath were committed to forms of political neutralism that run strongly against a political reading of their logical empiricism. In addition, Carnap and Neurath sharply differ on precisely the subject of the place of politics in logical empiricism, throwing into question the construct of the {\textquoteleft}Left Vienna Circle{\textquoteright} as a coherent, sociohistorical, programmatic unit within the Vienna Circle.},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@article {92726,
	title = {The Left Vienna Circle, Part 2. The Left Vienna Circle, disciplinary history, and feminist philosophy of science},
	journal = {Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A},
	volume = {40},
	number = {2},
	year = {2009},
	pages = {167-174},
	abstract = {This paper analyzes the claim that the Left Vienna Circle (LVC) offers a theoretical and historical precedent for a politically engaged philosophy of science today. I describe the model for a political philosophy of science advanced by LVC historians. They offer this model as a moderate, properly philosophical approach to political philosophy of science that is rooted in the analytic tradition. This disciplinary-historical framing leads to weaknesses in LVC scholars{\textquoteright} conception of the history of the LVC and its contemporary relevance. In this light, I examine the claim that there are productive enrichments to be gained from the engagement of feminist philosophy of science with the LVC, finding this claim ill-formulated. The case of LVC historiography and feminist philosophy of science presents a revealing study in the uses and ethics of disciplinary history, showing how feminist and other perspectives are misconceived and marginalized by forms of disciplinary self-narrativizing.},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@book {92731,
	title = {Revisiting Race in a Genomic Age},
	year = {2008},
	publisher = {Rutgers University Press},
	organization = {Rutgers University Press},
	address = {New Brunswick, NJ},
	abstract = {With the completion of the sequencing of the human genome in 2001, the debate over the existence of a biological basis for race has been revived. In Revisiting Race in a Genomic Age, interdisciplinary scholars join forces to examine the new social, political, and ethical concerns that are attached to how we think about emerging technologies and their impact on current conceptions of race and identity.Essays explore a range of topics that include drug development and the production of race-based therapeutics, the ways in which genetics could contribute to future health disparities, the social implications of ancestry mapping, and the impact of emerging race and genetics research on public policy and the media. As genetic research expands its reach, this volume takes an important step toward creating a useful interdisciplinary dialogue about its implications.},
	editor = {Sandra Lee and Barbara Koenig and Sarah S. Richardson}
}
@inbook {92736,
	title = {When Gender Criticism Becomes Standard Scientific Practice: The Case of Sex Determination Genetics},
	booktitle = {Gendered Innovations in Science and Engineering},
	year = {2008},
	pages = {22-42},
	publisher = {Stanford University Press},
	organization = {Stanford University Press},
	address = {Palo Alto, CA},
	author = {Sarah S. Richardson},
	editor = {Londa Schiebinger}
}
